4 Tuesday, October 22, 1996 OPINION UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN VIEWPOINT Voting along party lines can lead to bad results When students enter the voting booths in three weeks to cast their ballots for president and vice president, they probably will know where the candidate of their choice stands on important issues. Students also may be well-versed on the platforms of the congressional candidates for whom they vote. However, many students will know next to nothing about the candidates in races that receive less publicity, such as the State Board of Education. In Kansas this election year, many students who vote the party line in unfamiliar races and assume their votes are for mainline members of their chosen party may be disappointed with their choices. An example of the dangers of voting the party line concerns the Republican candidates in the Kansas State School Board races. Five of the nine seats on the state board are up for grabs, including the seats that represent Wichita, Emporia, Topeka and Johnson County. In each of these five races, the Republican candidate on the ticket is being aided and supported by the Kansas Education Watch Network. It is a conservative Christian organization whose public agenda diverges from that of mainstream Republicans. Its agenda includes removal of the federal government from Kansas schools, reduced spending on public schools, using federal money for private and home schooling and getting rid of drug and sex education. If the candidate endorsed by this organization wins in each of the five districts, the organization will have a six-vote majority on the state board and will be able to implement its agenda. Dick Rock, who has spent the last eight years in the Kansas Senate, associates the organization with a radical movement among Christian conservatives that, he says, want to destroy public education and replace it with Christian schools. Students who align themselves with the Democratic Party also should use caution when voting the party line, considering that Fred Phelps, the radically anti-gay minister from Topeka, ran as a Democrat in his last failed attempt to gain public office. Students should educate themselves on the platform of every candidate for whom they vote. Students can find out more about the candidates in less-publicized races by contacting their political party's local office or by calling other organizations, such as the Kansas National Education Association, and asking about its endorsements. BRENT SUITER FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD Stronger hazing sanctions could deter future violators After the discovery of two hazing incidents at the University the last week, administrators should consider taking additional action against the practice. Allegations were made last week against Zeta Beta Tau, that included forced alcohol consumption, paddling, sleep deprivation and head-butting. Zeta Beta Tau was suspended from its national fraternity pending an investigation. There are no standardized punishments for organizations that are convicted of hazing. Punishments are decided on a case-by-case basis. If the University is serious about a crackdown on hazing, then it should institute a standardized policy for punishing offenders. Delta Tau Delta was placed on probation last week for hazing incidents that occurred at the beginning of the semester. The fraternity was not, however, restricted from participating in University activities. If a fraternity is convicted of hazing and is placed on disciplinary probation, the organization should not be allowed to participate in University activities. THE KANSAN EDITORIAL BOARD KANSAN STAFF AMANDA TRAUGHBER Editor CRAIG LANG Managing editor MATT HOOD Associate managing editor for design KIMBERLY CRABTREE CHARITY JEFFRIES News editors DARCI L. McLAIN SARA ROSE Public relations directors Campus Susanna Lööt Jason Strait Amy McVey Editorial John Collar Nicole Kennedy Features Adam Ward Sports Bili Petulla Associate sports Caryn Foster Online editor David L. Teakau Photo Rich Devink Graphics Nicholas Musser Andy Rohrback Special sections Amy McVey Wire Debbie Staline KAREN GERSCH Business manager HEALY SMART Retail sales manager TOM EBLEN General manager, news adviser JAY STEINER Sales and marketing adviser JUSTIN KNUPP Technology coordinator Business Staff Campus mgr ... Mark Ozdemik Regional mgr ... Dennie Haupt Assistant Retail mgr ... Dana Centenzo National mgr ... Kurtia Hye International mgr ... Krista Hye Production mgr ... Dan Kopec Lisa Quebbman Marketing director .. Eric Johnson Creative director .. Desmond Lavelle Sales manager .. Steve Ploclette Mass Impact mgr ... Dena Plectoite Internet mgr ... Steve Sangor In 1992, the public criticized candidates in both parties for mudslinging. The presidential debates, and especially the vice-presidential debates, were verbal duels that resembled military skirmishes more than academic dialogues. Made-for-TV governors politics as image games Column by Andy Rohrback presidential debate in the 1960 election, even the most cynical pundits couldn't have predicted the trend the debate sparked. That trend has snowballed during the past 36 years into an entirely new way of choosing leaders. Today, voters rely less on a candidate's words and more on the candidate's image presented through television and other media. W then John F. Kennedy faced off against Richard Nixon in the first nationally televised In 1996, responding to public backlash against negative campaigning, Bob Dole and Bill Clinton toned down But the media is not alone in the blame for this shift. In fact, much like the politicians it interviews, the media spends much of its time and money struggling to find out what the people want. The trouble is, the people themselves often do not know another arena for the spin doctors and strategists that once occupied smoke-filled backstage offices. While political conventions used to be a forum for discussion and decision-making, they are now nothing but large-scale ad campaigns. At the Republican National Convention, for example, several delegates were coerced into casting their ballots for Bob Dole when state law and their constituents bound them to vote for other candidates, according to a September report on American Family Radio. The Democratic Party did not even field more than one major candidate, while in 1992, both parties saw hotly contested primary races. The purpose of national conventions is clear: to solidify support for the party's chosen candidate and to bring that preened, polished and primped candidate into the spot- "Politics has become yet another sport, another field of entertainment in which actors are paid to look good and smile a lot." their personal attacks. The response was hardly one of relief. Instead, people complained that this year's debates were boring and pointless. They switched to the baseball playoffs to watch something exciting. What has happened to the political life of this country? In essence, it has become controlled by an image-oriented entertainment culture — the culture of the sound bite and the makeup artist. Politics has become yet another sport, another field of entertainment in which the actors are paid to look good and smile a lot. Trivial matters such as ideas and issues are left to the analysts on CNN and C-SPAN, while the electorate makes its decision based on who has the best TV ad one-liners. It's not the kind of change that can happen overnight, of course. Political change always comes in stages. Nevertheless, 1996 probably will be looked back on as the year Americans gave themselves wholly to the image game. But the image game does not show up in only the presidential debates. Party conventions are The presidential debates are the Madison Square Garden of the image game. Live, before millions of TV viewers, two men stand behind well-decorated podiums and recite the mantras given to them by their advisers. And despite the fuss made by the networks' armada of analysts, the words politicians say aren't nearly as important as the image they present. What is it we remember about the candidates we see portrayed on television? Their ears. Their gestures. The trademarks imitated on Saturday Night Live. The comments made about them on Politically Incorrect. Another powerful element of the image game is the importance of labels. Besides the trite, overused liberal and conservative stamp, other tags come into play around election time. Words like radical, extremist, insider, outsider and partisan are used to pigeonhole candidates — and voters as well. Regardless of the meaning of light. these words, or of their deservedness, the stigma these labels carry is enough to frighten voters away from a particular candidate. Speech writers and spin doctors carefully weave these and countless other labels into their descriptions of the opposition. The names take attention away from the principles and issues the candidates stand for, and again throw the matter of choosing a leader into the arena of the image game. As long as the decision comes down to what I mark on my ballot, why should I worry about the posturing and pretense that goes on behind the scenes? The question is not simply one of morality or ethics. It is a question of whose hands we place in power. For example, if Americans allow the kingmakers in both parties to decide who is acceptable to rule, we grant to nameless, faceless, elite individuals the right to make our choices for us. We turn what should be an essay question into multiple choice, and base our choice not on the merits of each candidate, but on how he is dressed. So what? And if we base our choice of leaders on the popular media portrayal of the candidates, we give the comedians and commentators broad control on the elections. Is it wise to allow ourselves to sum up candidates, parties and agendas in sound bites and one-liners? George Bush: "Not ga na do it." Bill Clinton: "I feel your pain." Ross Perot: "I'm all ears." Bob Dole: "Old guy." What do these simplistic characterizations tell us about what these candidates believe? Illustration by Noah Musser Allowing labels to hang like price tags on candidates without understanding what those labels mean or how well they apply to one particular candidate gives the candidates themselves vast amounts of power before they are elected. If one candidate falls behind in the polls, he can simply call his opponent an extremist and gain votes. The power to sway voters with words is a dangerous one. Image-oriented politics created the society described in George Orwell's 1984. Remember the "Two Minutes Hate?" The Two Minutes Hate, which Big Brother used to breed fear in and submission among the masses. The entire society would be forced to stare at an image of a man called Goldstein, the enemy of the state. "Before the Hate had proceeded for thirty seconds, uncontrollable exclamations of rage were breaking out from half the people in the room. The self-satisfied sheep like face on the screen, and the terrifying power of the Eurasian army behind it, were too much to be borne; besides, the sight or even the thought of Goldstein produced fear and anger automatically." Do images have power? HUBIE By Greg Hardin